Knitted web.



R. W. SCOTT.

KNITTED WEB. v-

APPLIGATION FILED N0V.16, 1909.

Patented Nov. 24, 1914.

g 5% Li @l ll ll l d i' Li) UNITED STATES yPATEN T OFFICE.

ROBERT `W. SCOTT, OF LEEDS POINT,VN EW JERSEY, ASSIGNOR, BY DIRECT ANDMESNE \ASSIGNMENTS, TO SCOTT & WILLIAMS," INCORPORATED, OF CAMDEN, NEWJERSEY,

A CORPORATION OF NEW JERSEY.

KN ITTED WEB.

Specication of Letters Patent.

Patented Nov. 24, 1914.

T0 all 'whom z't may concern.'

Be it known that I, ROBERT W. SCOTT, a citizen of, the-United States,residing in Leeds Point, Atlantic county, New Jersey, have inventedcertain Improvements in Knitted Webs, of which the following is aspecification.

My invention consists of a certain improvement in the combined ribbedand plain knitted web for which I filed application for Letters Patentof the United States on the twenty-sixth day of May, 1909, Serial No.498,422, the object of my present invention being to still furtherfacilitate the transfer of the stitches of the ribbed web onto theneedles of the machine upon which the plain web is produced. This objectI attain in the manner hereinafter set forth, reference being had to theaccompanying drawing, which represents an exaggerated yiew of a portionof the composite web at the point where the ribbed web joins the plainweb.

The ribbed web -is knitted in accordance with my Letters Patent No.899,439, dated September 22, 1908, and consists of two independent butinterlocked ribbed webs, the wales of one web occupying the spacesbetween the wales of the other web and the sinker Wales crossing eachother. In such a web the wales of the two members of the web are in linewith one another but the courses are not, and consequently the terminalstitches of one member of said duplex interlocked ribbed web project toa greater extent than the terminal stitches of the other member, hencethese terminal stitches cannot be applied to the needles of the plainweb machine as readily as though the terminal stitches of both membersof the ribbed web were in line with one another. In order to overcomethis objection, I lengthen the terminal stitches of one member of theribbed web sufiiciently to bring them intov d line with the terminalstitches 'of the iother member. of said web, consequently they can beapplied to the needles with the same facility as a single stitch, thereceiving needles` entering the outer or fully expanded portions of theterminal stitches instead of being compelled to enter the stitches ofone of,v

the members of the web at the contracted or base portions of the same asin the'web coilstituting the subject of my previous application beforereferred to.

In the drawing, the wales of one member of the duplex interlocked ribbedweb are shown by unshaded lines and the wales of the other member ofsaid web are shown by shaded lines, a and b representing the terminalstitches of the wales of the two members of the ribbed web, theelongated stitches the reverse vmay be the case, if desired. Thestitches c 'are those of the first course .of the plain web which isknitted upon the needles of the machine to which the stitches a and b 0fthe ribbed web have been applied.

I claim y A knitted web having interlocked rib members with overlyingwales, the courses of the wales of one member also overlapping thecourses of the wales of the other member, and the terminal stitches ofthe' wales of. one4 vmember being elongated as compared with theterminal stitches of the corresponding wales of the other member,

whereby the terminal stitches of the overlying wales of both members arebrought into substantial registry.

` In testimony -whereo'f,.I have signed my name to this specification,in the presence of two subscribing witnesses.

ROBERT W. SCOTT.

Witnesses: HAMILTON D. TURNER,

KATE A. BEADLE.

1n this case being the stitches b, although.

